click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130208
20130216
SHOW
Hannity 16
Cavuto 15
( more )
STATION
FOXNEWS 81
MSNBC 79
MSNBCW 79
CSPAN 54
FBC 53
CSPAN2 33
CNBC 28
CNN 27
CNNW 27
WBAL (NBC) 23
KQED (PBS) 21
WUSA (CBS) 21
KPIX (CBS) 19
WJLA 19
WMAR (ABC) 19
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 899
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 911 (some duplicates have been removed)
the expenditures, deficits and surpluses, we end up with a net of almost $19 million short. the pending supplementals, both approved and pending before the board of supervisors amount to 6.4 million to the general fund. and then the use of the general re serve of 32.2 million. we are assuming you will need to use all of that reserve in order to balance the budget. and then the deposits to reserves, because of our increases to revenue, amount to 11 million. so, that brings us to a projected fund balance estimate of 174 million. as i mentioned before, 103 million of that was already committed to the year two. and the replenishment of the general re serve that we will be using this year needs to be incorporated in next year's budget, leaving us with a projected surplus of $38 million. so, the next slide provides you with a summary of our major tax revenue in the city and it shows you where the bulk of that surplus 72 million come from. and that is property transfer taxes, about $21 million over the budget as we are taking a look at the cash we've received thus far and estimating how much a
for us in terms of shortfalls. we projected a $5 76 million deficit. i think it's notable, to me it's notable about this table is that this is the -- this year with $129 million shortfall is really the best budget outlook we've had since fiscal 2007 and 2008. and it's -- we have climbed out of a significant hole. the mayor in december gave instructions to departments, asking them to reduce their ongoing general fund support by 3% over the next two years. so, 1-1/2% in each year. it's important to remember that 1-1/2% is only about $19 million. so, department solutionseses will always be a part of how the city balances its budget, but it certainly will not be the only way that we balance our budget. these are just more policy oriented instructions focusing on core functions, minimizing surface impacts. one of the things we're really interested in looking at is how are departments utilizing data to find opportunities for greater efficiency and to democrat on stray the effectiveness of their programs. and then of course to engage with their stakeholders. the last slide is the calendar
, and that is what the house democratic alternative did. we would replace with the -- sequester with deficit reduction achieved over a longer time. >> watch the entire interview sunday at 10:00 a.m. eastern and again later at 6:00 p.m. on c- span. now, douglas emmett dorf, director of the congressional budget office. this is just over one hour. >> thank you all for coming. i am the director of the congressional budget office. cbo just released its outlook for the federal budget and the economy over the next decade. i would like to tell you a little about it, and then my colleagues and i will be happy to take your questions. our analysis shows that the united states continues to face very large economic and budget challenges. under current law, we expect the unemployment rate will remain above 7.5% through next year. that would make 2014 the sixth year in a row that unemployment is so high, the longest such period in seven years. -- 70 years. also under current law, we expect budget deficits over the next decade to total about $7 trillion. with deficits so high, the federal debt on the public
deficits and the federal exchange subsidies alone are expected to cost $1 opinion.2 trillion and medicaid expansions are expected to reach $26.8 billion. first of all, the affordable -- 600 its $30 billion. -- $638 billion. entitlement spending. here we go, more entitlement spending. will this increase in spending with the medicaid expansions and the new exchange subsidies reduce health care costs growth as we look at the growth down the road? >> the affordable care act had a number of different pieces. the expansion of insurance coverage, we now estimates will cost $1.3 trillion over the 2013-2023 period. >> let me interrupt you there and make sure i understand, $1.3 trillion more than what was anticipated in previous outlooks of the program, is that correct? >> i'm saying that the costs of the coverage expansion relative to a world that did not have that coverage expansion. extra costs of $1.3 trillion. we have had many changes to the coverage expansion but netted out to very little change on balance for any given period of years. our estimates through 2019 are now actually slightly bel
with paul krugman is ahead. why he says the deficit doesn't matter now and why the government needs to spend more money. he ran two of the most important companies and turned around general motors. i will talk les sobs learned, the state of the american future. and baubles and bling. if you have the cash they have the jewels. if perfect valentine's gift for deep pockets. jewels anyone? >> co oh co always wore two. >> "on the money" begins now. >> announcer: this is america's number one financial news program. "on the money." now, mario bartiromo. >> here's a look at the news as we head into a new week on the money. it is the u.s. government versus standard & poor's. the most aggressive move yet to hold accountable a company at the center of the financial melt down of 2008. the $5 billion civil suit charges s&p intended to defraud investors by giving securities created from subprime loans aaa ratings they didn't deserve. the attorney says not so fast. >> the government has to show in this case not that a lot of people lost money because of the investments. government has to show the s&p liter
payoff toward the courthouse construction fund is retired. we will close that deficit. and, so, that deficit will be closed. it's a cumulative amount that is reducing every year and we estimate, i think, in three years that should be cleared. the open space fund will end a year with about $3 million, 3.6 within dt. and a negative 1.1 for central shops. what that means for central shops is unless they reduce their costs, that deficit then will be built into their rates to the departments for maintenance of vehicles in next fiscal year. and then finally some of the large enterprise departments, the airport operating fund has a healthy deficit of about $82 million -- excuse me, a surplus, fund balance of $82 million. mta, 57 million, port 30, and the three funds within the puc, hetch hetchy wastewater and the water operating fund are reported here. so, in summary, the local tax revenue is a primary driver of our net good condition. the five-year financial plan and the nine-month report will further inform the mayor and the board of supervisors of any changes that are anticipated.
the array of new initiatives will not add a dime to the deficit. >> nothing i am proposing should increase deficit by a dime. >> healthcare reform will not add a time to deficit. >> top white house aides say the president can cover the new ideas. and pay down the debt. by redirecting existing funds and wiping out tax loopholes and deductions. >> he will pay for this and have deficit reduction beyond paying for proposals. >> the top democrats tell fox in meetings before the "state of the union," white house officials privately said they are planning a multi-weak campaign outside the beltway. they are serve the economy is stalling again. today, new report found retail sales edged up disappointing .1% in january from december. commerce department resealed in december, they restock the inventory at the slowest pace since june. a sign sales are getting weak. this is why the president is focused on stimulus. >> why we are seeing signs of solid progress, the car sales are up. housing is starting to recover. we're a ways away from we need to be. >> last night's president offered up more of the sam
more about it. thank you for joining us. let's start with the debt and deficit since this is front and center as far as the international conversation as it may be. the cbo, congressional budget office, came out with new projections this week. they saw, long term, the economy will move in the opposite direction of the deficit. the economy grows if the deficit goes down, it shrinks if the deficit goes up. you argue in the book that the deficit really doesn't matter right now. do you disagree with the government's projections? >> no, i think the cbo report is pretty reasonable. and it says that we wish we had lower debt, and if we look at the long term it would be nice to pay down the debt but it does not show a crisis. and trying to slash the deficit right now will deepen the clear and present danger which is a very high unemployment and ongoing economic slump. so i actually -- i found the cbo report supportive of what i'm saying, that right now our priorities should be jobs and not the deficit. >> i want to get your reaction to something that dave camp told us, the chairman of the
the deficit in the long term. also by closing some of the tax loopholes. we heard in the last presidential campaign from mitt romney and paul rand that there are all these tax breaks and loopholes that disproportionately benefit very wealthy people. speaker john boehner said he could come up with $800 billion through a tax reform plan. we're simply saying to the house republicans that we want to do with speaker john boehner said he could do. use some of their revenue from closing loopholes to close the deposit. you are right. republicans so far have said they're not willing to close one tax loophole, not for a corporate jet for big tax -- big oil companies for the purpose of reducing the deficit. when it is that trade-off, are they more interested in protecting the economy and defense spending? then i think he will begin to see a little bit of a change in attitude. >> what is there is not a change in attitude and calculations? this deadline is different than previous ones. we were facing the prospect of a default. it was a stone wall. we could not afford to hit it. where were facing taxes
acknowledge must be dealt with. we've got a deficit that needs to be brought down. we've got an economy that needs growth. -- growth. and this is one of those areas, up with of those committees where we need to have this debate. we're going to be processing legislation, we're going to be considering alternatives and i want to say on behalf of those of us on this side of the aisle, we look forward to engaging our friends on the other side of the aisle in the collegial and comity way we have. with that, welcome to today's hearing. thanks again, dr. elmendorf, doug, for coming and testifying. i want to thank you for your -- your staff for putting together the latest budget and economic outlook. we understand you had a bit of a time crunch given the end of the year episode that occurred and i wanted to say that you didn't miss much of a deadline and you put out your baseline and outlook in a fairly quick form, given the circumstances you had to contend with. i'm sorry to say, though, that things don't look good. the c.b.o. says our economy will grow by only 1347b9% this year. unemployment w
." his new e book is called here's the deal washington can solve the deficit and spur growth. he's at the columbia business school and economic advisors during joarnlings w. bush's first charym. robert altman served as deputy treasury secretary during president clinton's first term. let me begin with roger altman in boston. we're taking this before the state of the union address but the economy's not going to change that much between now and then. and i assume you have an idea of what the president is going to say. was it important for the president to say? >> well, i have not seen the speech charlie, but i would like to see a pathway to agreement on the tax and spending issues which have preoccupied washington now for the ug long es period in the past three months and facing us with the sequester of the continuing resolution and so forth. do i expect to see that pathway in other words in the real world? i don't. i think the presidencies himself as riding high. he won the election decisively. he got a deal on his terms as the whitehouse sees it on the fiscal cliff. he got the rep
deficit by more than $2.5 trillion through a balanced mix of cuts and tax for the wealthiest americans. that is more than both parties say we need to stabilize our debt. i believe e we can finish the job the same way we started it, with a balanced cut of spending cuts and tax reform. and the majority of the american people agree, both democrats and republicans. my preference and the preference of many members of congress is to do that in a balanced way by making sensible changes to entitlement programs and reforming our tax code. as we speak, both the house and senate are working toward budget proposals i hope will lay out this balanced path going forward. wut that takes time and right now, if congress doesn't act by march 1 a series of harmful doubts spending also known as the sequester are scheduled to take effect. and the result could be a huge blow to middle class families and our economy as a whole. if it goes forward thousands of workers are likely to be laid off, firefighters and food specttors could find themselves out of work leaving ourselves vulnerable. programs like head st
prize winner says the deficit doesn't matter now and why the government needs to spend even more money. >>> he ran two of the nation's largest and most important companies and turned around general motors. i'll talk lessons learned, the state of american business and the future with ed whitacre. >>> and bling, if you've got the cash, they've got the jewels. the perfect valentine's day gift if you have deep pockets. jewels, anyone? "on the money" begins right now. >> this is america's number one financial news program, "on the money." now, maria bartiromo. >> here's what's making news as we head into a new week "on the money." it is the u.s. government versus standard & poor's. the most aggressive move yet by the justice department to hold accountable a financial company at the center of the financial melt down of 2008. the $5 billion civil suit charges s&p intended to defraud investors, aaa ratings they did not deserve. standard & poor's' attorney says not so farst fast. >> the ratings that were issued were believed by the people who issued them and that's what the government has got t
's happened to the deficit, the annual deficit? 2008 deficit was $458 billion. too much money. yes. but $458 billion. deficit in 2013, 2012, $1.3 trillion. so what's the problem? ladies and gentlemen, i would suggest to you we have a spending debt crisis, not a revenue debt crisis. and you've got to make the right diagnosis. to put it in a little greater context. we spend about $3.6 trillion as a nation, as a whole each year, $3.6 trillion, about $2.5 trillion, $2.6 trillion is medicare, medicaid, social security and interest on the debt. those four things. the entire federal government, the rest of the entire federal government, everything, everything, post office, roads, transportation, justice, education, energy, defense, everything else is about $1 trillion. you all just heard what the deficit was last year. $1.3 trillion. which means we can do away with the entire federal government with the exception of medicare, medicaid and social security and we wouldn't even balance the budget. that's the magnitude of the challenge that we have. so it's incumbent upon us to come up with solutions,
voters reacted to. in particular, deficit. when barack obama said it was not going to add a dime to have deficit there is a positive reaction among republicans and democrats. let's take a look at that clip. >> nothing i'm proposed tonight should increase our deficit by a dime. it is not a bigger government we need but a smarter government that sets priorities and invests in broad-based growth. that is what we should be looking for. >> there were rare moments when republicans and democrats azbreed i want to ask one question. do you believe him that his policies will not add to the deficit? do you believe it?. >> no. no. >> why don't you believe it?. >> look at the deficit. it keeps growing spiralling out of control continuing to grow. i don't see evidence it's going the other way. >> he made a commitment it won't go up. >> he's got to come up with it. >> he said $3,000 for people to refinance their homes we'd get a tax break for that. but he didn't tell us where it's going to come from. >> i believe he is believing what he wants to do. and he wants to do the best thing for the country. he
and whatever issues not adding to the deficit isn't that going to be the equivalent after war call to republicans? >> well owe is going to talk about the budget and not adding to the deficit as you said, neil but he is going to, once again, try to often titlement reforms as part of the so-called balanced approach that he wants to take here. neil: we're having some problem with your audio, peter. maybe we can rich that. meantime, rich edson, this is a battle republicans have to take on, or just dismiss or hope the temperment of the country will improve so they're more open to challenging this president on new spending initiatives whether they add to the deficit or not. what do you think?. >> that's it, neil. when you think of what the president is looking for here. it is not to address the deficit and address the national debt. this is issue of calling increased spending, increased spending in infrastructure. the democratic argument has been to spend on education, spend on infrastructure all these other things to help create economic growth and therefore create revenue to help close
? >> i think it will be unnecessary. we already cut $2 billion from the deficit. the president is serious enough about his desire to close the deal that he's been willing to keep his offer to speaker boehner on the table. so i think if we could come together and compromise, we could get the rest of the way there and stabilizing our debt, bringing our deficits way below 3% of gdp. and i think it would be unfortunate for anyone at this point to start saying that they should take an absolutist position. they can't have a penny of reven revenue. $800 billion in expenditures and loopholes that could be used to reduce the deficit. how can it be now there's not one penny? that you have to do it all in medicare, education, medicaid, but you can't find one penny of a loophole, tax expenditure even for the most well off american that could be part of a deficit reduction package. >> couldn't the other side have said that to you back in january when they actually raised taxes but they got -- they didn't get revenue? i'm sorry. they didn't get any cuts? so it's the same thing, right? because the repub
the deficits by more than 2.5 trillion dollars. mostly through spending cuts, but also by raising tax rates on the wealthiest 1% of americans. as a result, we are more than halfway towards the goal of 4 trillion dollars in deficit reduction that economists say we need to stable highs our finances. tonight, i'll layout additional proposals fully paid for and fully consistent with the budget frame work, both parties agreed to just 18 months ago. let me repeat. nothing i'm proposing tonight should increase our deficit by a single dime. >> amazing that the president can say that with a straight face according to the treasury department since the day he accepted in the oval office, 5.8 trillion dollars and guess that, joining me with reaction we call him the great one, probably easier to get an interview with obama and the pope than to get you out of that bunker, welcome oh great one, how are you. >> i'm good, how are you, brother. >> sean: this figure, let's go to this. he says this thing is not going to add one dime to the deficit and republicans came out with an ad. let's start there. >> noth
and additional revenue to reduce the deficit. on international matters, half the 70,000 u.s. troops now in afghanistan will be home by this time next year. we knew that. he'll criticize north korea's nuclear test saying that country will not be allowed back into the international community. >> chris: i wanted to tell people what you are seeing. these are members of the cabinet. it's a remark sight, state of the union address. the entire united states government is there. the gray hiavd gentleman there in the center of the screen is the new white house chief of staff who may have the second toughest job and attorney general eric holder but the entire government is here. all of the senate and house and cabinet and joint chiefs of staff. the supreme court, it's quite a remark sight. on a slightly grizzly note, one member of the cabinet is always told to stay away to be in effect in hiding so if something should happen, there would be somebody to run the u.s. government. in this particular case it is energy secretary steven chew. i was there at the briefing that he gave today and he really
of the union" here is neil cavuto. neil: nothing ever proposing tonight should increase our deficit by a single dime. barack obama's promise to the nation tonight that it is not a bigger government we need, but a smarter government that sets priorities and invests in broadbased growth. the upshot from that centerpiece remark planned for a little more than one hour from now. the president of the united states is not going to go crazy cutting down the debt. in fact, the white house indicates today that he is largely -- he has largely done that already. the 4 trillion in budget cuts have already been largely committed to and for, and that is it. needless to say, 4 trillion is over two years, and the president's is factoring in the sequestration cuts that supposedly taken into weeks, and that is no slam-dunk. and the other cuts he is referring to are sort of rehash cuts. suffice it to say that however speeches the left, then there are the cuts. after that no more. the president's battle to rein in the debt is done. and this housing big and bigger government is on. and if republicans don't like it ,
, in the public deficit. this is only one small part that they succeeded in bringing this view through, and it's also, that has consequences of course for economic policies. and, therefore, it's very important, and, of course, american economic debate has huge influence on european debates. it's very important that we are talking together, that we are working together and that we are trying to make a more differentiated approach on what and how to make policies engage the crisis. and that is, that is important because, and let me say that, because this room is full of progressives. that's my view when i came here. we have to be sure about one thing, or if we have to we think one thing. what is aggressive politics today? -- progressive politics today. this seems a fun question, but that's a very important question. and let me, let me tell you what i mean about this. progressive politics meant, when i grew up and i was born in 1960, it was very clear in germany that my father fought, my son is going to have a better life this is no longer clear in europe. i think it's no longer clear in the u.s.
the accusation system. but both the strategic approach deficit deduction and sufficient use of defense dollars will be undermined by sequestration. and what is particularly tragic is that sequestration is not a result of an economic recession for an emergency. it's not because discretionary spending cuts are the answer to our nation's fiscal challenge. you can do the math. it's not in reaction to a more peaceful world. in reference to the north korea nuclear test this morning. it's not due to a breakthrough in military technology or a new strategic insight. it's not because of the path of revenue growth and entitlement spending have been explored and exhausted. it's not because sequestration was ever a plan that was intended to be implemented. all of this is purely the collateral damage of political gridlock. for our troops, for the force, the consequences are very real and personal. i'll give you a few examples. we intend, the president intends to -- personnel sequestration from -- but the troops will feel the effect of the this very directly in other ways. for example, he referenced the canc
's deficit by more than $700 billion. there are many subjects the treasury secretary must cover. not any treasury nominee can have expertise immediately in all of them. the jack has an uncanny ability to dive into a subject, learn, study, and master it in a factual and non-ideological way. i look forward to working with jack and the rest of the economic team as we continue to focus on protecting the middle- class and combating our nation's long-term economic challenges. mr. chairman, i am confident that this nominee has expertise and work ethic necessary to excel as secretary of treasury. he will not be an ordinary treasury secretary. he will be a great one in the mold of albert gallatin and alexander hamilton, another new yorker, one who i never knew. [laughter] i fully support this nomination and urge that we move as quickly as possible so the senate and confirm this nominee and he can get on with the important task necessary to continue moving this country forward economically. jack, congratulations on your nomination. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. likewise, i'm very pleas
should increase our deficit by a single dime. also, the plan to hike the minimum wage to $9 per hour. a boot to the economy or a jobs killer? i will break it down. and, we'll president obama's latest plan keep your money safe? "the willis report" is on the case. gerri: all of that and more coming up. but first, call him the magician in chief. president obama is proposing tens of billions of dollars in new spending. he says that won't cost us a dime. now, that really is magic. fresh off the state of the union speech, the president hit the road today to push his new economic agenda that looks exactly like his old economic agenda. dozens of new federal spending programs. from the federal education program, building homes in rundown neighborhoods all over the country. the estimates of this the cost her at least $130 billion. on top of what we already owe. who really knows? not even the president. he has encountered it up. one thing we do know is that it is like pulling a rabbit out of a hat. with us now is tim huelskamp of kansas. also harvard economist. >> cut spending, not go the other
, and in terms of the sequester, i agree with the last guest. in many ways between the fed and the deficit spending on the deficit level, even though it's going to be smaller this year, it's hard to beat, that so i think the sequester, where we really demonstrate that the growth in many ways is paid for because when you stop it's going to take away jobs, those kind of black reality swans will be the issue for the market ahead. >> brian gendron, where are you on this and how do you want to be invested? >> we don't think this rally is over entirely. if you extrapolate a 5% or 6% return we've had so far this year, we'll have one of the greatest stock markets of all time in the face of, you know, good earnings but not great earnings, in the face of still slow growth. i think that's a little unrealistic so we'll probably get a little bit of a pullback, unusual if we didn't. still recommending a substantial allocation to equities. this year looks like last year, political uncertainty. last year was a good year for stocks. as for stocks versus bonds, i've been thinking it was the end of a 30-year
deficits and debt, president obama will call for more spending and investment, we're told, in tonight's "state of the union" address. meanwhile, speaker of the house boehner says the president "doesn't have the guts to go against his liberal base. " we have extensive coverage throughout "special report" tonight. first up, chief white house correspondent ed henry with just released excerpts. good evening, ed. >> good evening, bret. you are right. dramatic news night. this is a big moment for the president. this may be his last "state of the union" before he is a lame duck. the last chance for him in a "state of the union" to really grab the nation by the lapel and deliver the message. aides say he plans to use the opportunity tonight being forceful and arguing for a stronger, middle class. while somehow not adding to the deficit with new proposals. as you noted. an excerpt. just given to us by the white house and what he will say. "tonight, i will lay out additional proposals that are fully paid for and fully consistent with the budget framework, both parties agreed to just 18 months a
and says it is about to explode the deficit and there is no way you can talk about spending on things like infrastructure, kind of change initiatives come in green initiatives, all kids initiatives, and so many other initiatives. without initiating a lot bigger deficits. rand paul is here to say that not only does the math not add up, nothing of that. senator, it is great to have you. >> thank you for having me, neil. neil: or do you do now? what do you do? what you advocate republicans do? >> i think we have to point out the truth. we cannot let the president went on the country saying that he has cut the deficit by $2 trillion. well, that is absurd. we have increased our debt by $6 trillion in his first term. what did he say? bowl, because i didn't increase it, i have reduced it to trillion dollars? that is absurd. he added $6 trillion to the debt and that is just a fact. he must have listed 50 different new programs and they are not going to cost you anything. neil: the deficit immediately raised concerns as to how it will be paid for. when he mentioned about closing tax loopholes and
rate today is higher than that of frugal canada. a new congressional budget office report says deficits are returning to precrisis levels within a few years. we don't need some big and grand bargain. even moderate reform on immigration, gun control, energy policy, and most difficult, the budget, would give a powerful boost to the country beyond any specific economic impact. you see, politicians could demonstrate that they could actually govern. everyone would get some credit. and america would finally have found a center. for more on this, you can red read my column in this week's "time" magazine. let's get started. >>> so now you know my thoughts on how the white house and congress can get some work done. let's get straight to what other people think. joining me today, paul krugman, op-ed columnist for "the new york times," the author of "end this depression now" just out in paper back and on "the new york times" bestseller list. mort zuckerman, publisher of u.s. news and world report, publisher of "the daily news" and he has a few real estate holdings here and there. arianna huffingto
the national institutes of health where you are hindering growth you are not delegate t going te deficit. we need more revenue and more cuts. i would like to see that in a big balanced bold proposal. short of that, we must do something to avoid the sequester. >> chris: here is what house speaker boehner said this week. >> at some point, washington, has to deal with its spending problem. i have watched them kick this can down the road for 22 years that i have been here. i have had enough of it. it's time to act. >> chris: congress woman, let's look at the numbers. are you really saying in a government that spends $3.5 trillion a year increased discretionary spending by 14% in the last four years you can't $85 billion to cut to avoid the sequester. >> we have made the cut in terms of agriculture subsidies. there are tens of billions of dollars in cuts there. and that should be balanced with eliminating subsidies for big oil. why should we lower pell grants instead of eliminating the subsidies for big oil? >> chris: why not just cut spending. 85 billion north dakota a $3.5 trillion government.
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 911 (some duplicates have been removed)